Re: LS PROGRAM: MOQ Catechism

From: Diana McPartlin (diana@hongkong.com)
Date: Mon Mar 15 1999 - 12:48:23 GMT


Magnus, Mary, Rich, Bruce and squad

Magnus wrote
>As many have said, there are countless ways to introduce the MoQ to a
>person. Since we only have 45 minutes, we can't tell them all, so which
>one do we pick?
>
>We could, as Diana suggested, reduce the MoQ to some short principles, or
>to be really brief, just the one sentence - Good is a noun. I don't know if
>that would do the trick though, it's one thing to know what such hip shot
>principles mean when you already understand the MoQ. It's a completely
>different matter to understand the MoQ from such principles. To use the
>Dakota metaphor, you have to climb the mountain to see the plains.

Yes and that's why I said the principles were just the first stage. You
clarify what you want to say first and then you decide how you are going to
say it.

As I said:
> Rich wrote:
>>I agree with Bruce that there are two questions we must deal with.
>>
>>1) Principles of the MoQ
>>2) Method of presentation
>
>So do I. And it's a complete mystery to me why anyone wouldn't agree with
>this. You figure out what you want to say, then you figure out how you're
>going to say it.

It is not a question of creating a "standard" presentation, but there are
obviously certain key elements that you have to cover if you are going to
give a proper introduction to the moq.

As I said:
>if you isolate areas to cover in a presentation of the MOQ you'd have
>to mention:
>
>Quality
>Dynamic & Static
>Inorganic, Biological, Social, Intellectual patterns
>Morality
>
>Which is not very many things really

To put it another way, you can change the setting, the cast, perhaps even
the script, but if it doesn't have a ghost, a skull and a mad Danish
prince, then it isn't Hamlet.

You mention introducing people to the MOQ without even mentioning it
outright. Well, that's fine, but it isn't the question that was asked. We
were asked how to give a semi-formal presentation on the subject. Actually
if I was asked to give one next week or even next year I would refuse
because I don't believe I could do it well enough to do justice to the
theory. I'm undecided on the question of whether or not it is possible to
give a presentation on the MOQ, however I'm willing to explore
possibilities before I dismiss it.

And judging from Mary's report it does seem to me that she could have
benefited from a little more study of the underlying theory before she
started talking. Then she wouldn't have been caught out by obvious
questions like why "morality" and "What is dynamic quality".

And on to Rich's post which lays out the work we have to do before we can
think about making a proper presentation:

>a) Necessary reevalutation of today's metaphysical and ethical
> assumptions, problems, conflicts.
> -what is value? "just" what you like?
> -relative and absolute "truth" and "value"
> -various platypi created by our inherited SOM
> -here I see the biggest difficulty presented by Mary's problem -
>convincing others of the inadequacy of so many "unconscious" or
>unstated views we have. (SOM) Most people are not dynamically
>open to being told that their intellectual coordinates are not
>the "best" available to them. Why bother with a "meta.. what?"
>anyways? I was perfectly happy eating fast food living
>vicariously through my television until you came along!
>
>b) Reality = Quality = Morality
> -ultimately undefinable yet immediately knowable and undeniable
> -and I think words can certainly draw a picture from which the
> viewer may infer the underlying essential meaning.
>
>c) Manifested & Experienced as Static and Dynamic
> -give approximate definitions - illustrate underlying meaning
> -collect clear examples
>
>d) Static Levels - boundaries need to be drawn
> - collect clear examples
>
>e) Evolution:
> i - dependent coexistence
> ii - static moral conflict and dynamic resolution
> iii - ethical guidelines for intellectual movement (?)
>
>f) Empiricism and Epistemology
> -"pre-intellectual cutting edge of reality"
> -quality creates subjective awareness of objects (and subjects)
> -Hume, Kant, Hindus, Mystics, etc...

Looks excellent to me. I can't wait to get started. But how do I convince
the rest of the squad that a little bit of hard work, a little delayed
gratification, will be worth it ten times over in the long run?

Didn't Bodvar once mention that Pirsig had told him that he considers the
Lila Squad to be the sequel to LILA? The work we are doing here is
important, more important than any individual within the group.

Diana

MOQ Online - http://www.moq.org



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Jan 17 2002 - 13:08:39 GMT